-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
C, distinguish between tag names and ordinary names #8313
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
I believe the PR is ready for more throughout testing. It would be great if users of the C domain can try it out, both directly and with the config (Ping for those I remember may have interest: @Shamino0, @vstinner, @mchehab, @utzig) |
On a quick test, the remaining warnings I was getting with the Linux Kernel docs with Sphinx 3.x have gone after this patch set. Thanks! I'm looking forward to see those patches applied to 3.2.2 ;-) |
Just to be sure, this is also the case with
I'm afraid the changes are too large to put them in 3.2.2, but if nothing major breaks it may be possible to move it to 3.3 instead. |
Yes. I'm attaching the full conf.py I'm using on such test.
That's a bad news. We want this bug to be solved as soon as possible, as we want to ensure that new patches won't be introducing more htmldocs build warnings.
Well, this would be better than having to wait until a next major release. When 3.3 is planned to be released?
|
@jakobandersen I run this PR now and it fixes most of the duplicate symbol issues, but I see a few new warnings:
Those come from these definitions: https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/blob/master/include/bluetooth/conn.h#L310 Probably related to the anonymous unions. Also:
From these definitions: https://github.com/nrfconnect/sdk-nrfxlib/blob/master/nrf_security/include/mbedcrypto_glue/mbedtls/ccm_alt.h#L40 Not sure if it's because of the redefinition in the typedef and struct names. There are more such issues but all seem somewhat related. Using |
What is the state of this PR .. actually in process? |
It's not dead, just progressing very very slowly :-). I will update it to take the anonymous types into account as soon as possible, so we can do another round of testing. |
99cb38f
to
62ed928
Compare
So, I think the PR is ready for another test:
|
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…kb() make htmldocs warns: Documentation/driver-api/80211/mac80211:109: ./include/net/mac80211.h:5170: WARNING: Duplicate C declaration, also defined at mac80211:1117. Declaration is '.. c:function:: void ieee80211_tx_status (struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb)'. This is because there's a function named ieee80211_tx_status() and a struct named ieee80211_tx_status. This has been discussed previously but no solution found: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ There's also a bug open for three years with no solution in sight: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 So I guess we have no other solution than to a workaround this in the code, for example to rename the function to ieee80211_tx_status_skb() to avoid the name conflict. I got the idea for the name from ieee80211_tx_status_noskb() in which the skb is not provided as an argument, instead with ieee80211_tx_status_skb() the skb is provided. Compile tested only. Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <[email protected]>
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…kb() make htmldocs warns: Documentation/driver-api/80211/mac80211:109: ./include/net/mac80211.h:5170: WARNING: Duplicate C declaration, also defined at mac80211:1117. Declaration is '.. c:function:: void ieee80211_tx_status (struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb)'. This is because there's a function named ieee80211_tx_status() and a struct named ieee80211_tx_status. This has been discussed previously but no solution found: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ There's also a bug open for three years with no solution in sight: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 So I guess we have no other solution than to a workaround this in the code, for example to rename the function to ieee80211_tx_status_skb() to avoid the name conflict. I got the idea for the name from ieee80211_tx_status_noskb() in which the skb is not provided as an argument, instead with ieee80211_tx_status_skb() the skb is provided. Compile tested only. Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]>
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…void ambiguities We currently have a struct ssam_request_sync and a function ssam_request_sync(). While this is valid C, there are some downsides to it. One of these is that current Sphinx versions (>= 3.0) cannot disambiguate between the two (see disucssion and pull request linked below). It instead emits a "WARNING: Duplicate C declaration" and links for the struct and function in the resulting documentation link to the same entry (i.e. both to either function or struct documentation) instead of their respective own entries. While we could just ignore that and wait for a fix, there's also a point to be made that the current naming can be somewhat confusing when searching (e.g. via grep) or trying to understand the levels of abstraction at play: We currently have struct ssam_request_sync and associated functions ssam_request_sync_[alloc|free|init|wait|...]() operating on this struct. However, function ssam_request_sync() is one abstraction level above this. Similarly, ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() is not a function operating on struct ssam_request_sync, but rather a sibling to ssam_request_sync(), both using the struct under the hood. Therefore, rename the top level request functions: ssam_request_sync() -> ssam_request_do_sync() ssam_request_sync_with_buffer() -> ssam_request_do_sync_with_buffer() ssam_request_sync_onstack() -> ssam_request_do_sync_onstack() Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/085e0ada65c11da9303d07e70c510dc45f21315b.1656756450.git.mchehab@kernel.org/ Link: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]> Patchset: surface-sam
…kb() commit 2703bc8 ("wifi: mac80211: rename ieee80211_tx_status() to ieee80211_tx_status_skb()") upstream. make htmldocs warns: Documentation/driver-api/80211/mac80211:109: ./include/net/mac80211.h:5170: WARNING: Duplicate C declaration, also defined at mac80211:1117. Declaration is '.. c:function:: void ieee80211_tx_status (struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb)'. This is because there's a function named ieee80211_tx_status() and a struct named ieee80211_tx_status. This has been discussed previously but no solution found: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ There's also a bug open for three years with no solution in sight: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 So I guess we have no other solution than to a workaround this in the code, for example to rename the function to ieee80211_tx_status_skb() to avoid the name conflict. I got the idea for the name from ieee80211_tx_status_noskb() in which the skb is not provided as an argument, instead with ieee80211_tx_status_skb() the skb is provided. Compile tested only. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit 2703bc8 ("wifi: mac80211: rename ieee80211_tx_status() to ieee80211_tx_status_skb()"). Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]>
…i driver up to v6.7 (#69) * wifi: mac80211: add support for mld in ieee80211_chswitch_done commit a469a59 ("wifi: mac80211: add support for mld in ieee80211_chswitch_done") upstream. This allows to finalize the CSA per link. In case the switch didn't work, tear down the MLD connection. Also pass the ieee80211_bss_conf to post_channel_switch to let the driver know which link completed the switch. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit a469a59 ("wifi: mac80211: add support for mld in ieee80211_chswitch_done"). Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Grumbach <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230828130311.3d3eacc88436.Ic2d14e2285aa1646216a56806cfd4a8d0054437c@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: support antenna control in injection commit ef246a1 ("wifi: mac80211: support antenna control in injection") upstream. Support antenna control for injection by parsing the antenna radiotap field (which may be presented multiple times) and telling the driver about the resulting antenna bitmap. Of course there's no guarantee the driver will actually honour this, just like any other injection control. If misconfigured, i.e. the injected HT/VHT MCS needs more chains than antennas are configured, the bitmap is reset to zero, indicating no selection. For now this is only set up for two anntenas so we keep more free bits, but that can be trivially extended if any driver implements support for it that can deal with hardware with more antennas. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit ef246a1 ("wifi: mac80211: support antenna control in injection"). Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230920211508.f71001aa4da9.I00ccb762a806ea62bc3d728fa3a0d29f4f285eeb@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: Rename and update IEEE80211_VIF_DISABLE_SMPS_OVERRIDE commit 00f823b ("wifi: mac80211: Rename and update IEEE80211_VIF_DISABLE_SMPS_OVERRIDE") upstream. EMLSR operation and SMPS operation cannot coexist. Thus, when EMLSR is enabled, all SMPS signaling towards the AP should be stopped (it is expected that the AP will consider SMPS to be off). Rename IEEE80211_VIF_DISABLE_SMPS_OVERRIDE to IEEE80211_VIF_EML_ACTIVE and use the flag as an indication from the driver that EMLSR is enabled. When EMLSR is enabled SMPS flows towards the AP MLD should be stopped. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit 00f823b ("wifi: mac80211: Rename and update IEEE80211_VIF_DISABLE_SMPS_OVERRIDE"). Signed-off-by: Ilan Peer <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230928172905.fb2c2f9a0645.If6df5357568abd623a081f0f33b07e63fb8bba99@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: make mgd_protect_tdls_discover MLO-aware commit 271d14b ("wifi: mac80211: make mgd_protect_tdls_discover MLO-aware") upstream. Since userspace can choose now what link to establish the TDLS on, we should know on what channel to do session protection. Add a link id parameter to this callback. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit 271d14b ("wifi: mac80211: make mgd_protect_tdls_discover MLO-aware"). Signed-off-by: Miri Korenblit <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230928172905.ef12ce3eb835.If864f406cfd9e24f36a2b88fd13a37328633fcf9@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: add a driver callback to add vif debugfs commit a1f5dcb ("wifi: mac80211: add a driver callback to add vif debugfs") upstream. Add a callback which the driver can use to add the vif debugfs. We used to have this back until commit d260ff1 ("mac80211: remove vif debugfs driver callbacks") where we thought that it will be easier to just add them during interface add/remove. However, now with multi-link, we want to have proper debugfs for drivers for multi-link where some files might be in the netdev for non-MLO connections, and in the links for MLO ones, so we need to do some reconstruction when switching the mode. Moving to this new call enables that and MLO drivers will have to use it for proper debugfs operation. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit a1f5dcb ("wifi: mac80211: add a driver callback to add vif debugfs"). Signed-off-by: Miri Korenblit <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230928172905.ac38913f6ab7.Iee731d746bb08fcc628fa776f337016a12dc62ac@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: Notify the low level driver on change in MLO valid links commit 041a74c ("wifi: mac80211: Notify the low level driver on change in MLO valid links") upstream. Notify the low level driver when there is change in the valid links. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit 041a74c ("wifi: mac80211: Notify the low level driver on change in MLO valid links"). Signed-off-by: Ilan Peer <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230920211508.4fc85b0a51b0.I64238e0e892709a2bd4764b3bca93cdcf021e2fd@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: Check if we had first beacon with relevant links commit e433304 ("wifi: mac80211: Check if we had first beacon with relevant links") upstream. If there is a disassoc before the fisrt beacon we need to protect a session for the deauth frame. Currently we are checking if we had a beacon in the default link, which is wrong in a MLO connection and link id != 0. Fix this by checking all the active links, if none had a beacon then protect a session. If at least one link had a beacon there is no need for session protection. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit e433304 ("wifi: mac80211: Check if we had first beacon with relevant links"). Signed-off-by: Miri Korenblit <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231004120820.d290f0ab77b0.Ic1505cf3d60f74580d31efa7e52046947c490b85@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: add link id to mgd_prepare_tx() commit e76f3b4 ("wifi: mac80211: add link id to mgd_prepare_tx()") upstream. As we are moving to MLO and links terms, also the airtime protection will be done for a link rather than for a vif. Thus, some drivers will need to know for which link to protect airtime. Add link id as a parameter to the mgd_prepare_tx() callback. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit e76f3b4 ("wifi: mac80211: add link id to mgd_prepare_tx()"). Signed-off-by: Miri Korenblit <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230928172905.c7fc59a6780b.Ic88a5037d31e184a2dce0b031ece1a0a93a3a9da@changeid Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: mac80211: rename ieee80211_tx_status() to ieee80211_tx_status_skb() commit 2703bc8 ("wifi: mac80211: rename ieee80211_tx_status() to ieee80211_tx_status_skb()") upstream. make htmldocs warns: Documentation/driver-api/80211/mac80211:109: ./include/net/mac80211.h:5170: WARNING: Duplicate C declaration, also defined at mac80211:1117. Declaration is '.. c:function:: void ieee80211_tx_status (struct ieee80211_hw *hw, struct sk_buff *skb)'. This is because there's a function named ieee80211_tx_status() and a struct named ieee80211_tx_status. This has been discussed previously but no solution found: https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ There's also a bug open for three years with no solution in sight: sphinx-doc/sphinx#8313 So I guess we have no other solution than to a workaround this in the code, for example to rename the function to ieee80211_tx_status_skb() to avoid the name conflict. I got the idea for the name from ieee80211_tx_status_noskb() in which the skb is not provided as an argument, instead with ieee80211_tx_status_skb() the skb is provided. Compile tested only. deepin-Intel-SIG: commit 2703bc8 ("wifi: mac80211: rename ieee80211_tx_status() to ieee80211_tx_status_skb()"). Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> * wifi: cfg80211: annotate iftype_data pointer with sparse commit e8c1841 ("wifi: cfg80211: annotate iftype_data pointer with sparse") upstream. There were are a number of cases in mac80211 and iwlwifi (at least) that used the sband->iftype_data pointer directly, instead of using the accessors to find the right array entry to use. Make sparse warn when such a thing is done. To not have a lot of casts, add two helper functions/macros - ieee80211_set_sband_iftype_data() - for_each_sband_iftype_data() deepin-Intel-SIG: commit e8c1841 ("wifi: cfg80211: annotate iftype_data pointer with sparse"). Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> [ Furong Zhou: amend commit log ] Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> --------- Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Grumbach <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Gregory Greenman <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Furong Zhou <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Ilan Peer <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Miri Korenblit <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Emmanuel Grumbach <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Johannes Berg <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Ilan Peer <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Miri Korenblit <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Kalle Valo <[email protected]>
Hi, what's the state of this PR ? Is it abandoned or is there any hope that it will be merged some day ? Edit: I guess there is still the intersphinx issue ? Is this second PR still making progress ? |
Feature or Bugfix
Purpose
Introduce tagged names, as in the language, in the end fixing #7819. That is,
declares the names
struct A
,union B
, andenum C
, whiledeclares the name
A
. Macros, enumerators, typedefs, and (member) variables are in the same space as functions.(TODO: there is not yet a duplicate check in the tagged space, so two struct/union/enum can have the same name right now)This means that nested names potentially must include the full tagging. E.g., for
then the fully qualified name for
D
isstruct A.unioin B.enum C.D
.For names appearing inside declarations, the tagging must be present, which may give extra warnings. E.g., for
there will now be a warning about missing target for the
A
inf
, because it should be tagged, like ing
.However, for now, for backwards compatibility, when writing cross-references an untagged nested name component will match also a tagged declaration (the first one). This means the following works
As a nice side-effect, this incidentally now lets
c:type
roles properly parse tagged names, without the pre-v3 flag.However, note that if a function has the same name as a tagged entity and a cross-reference does not explicitly contain a tag, then the function is selected. That is, lookup is tried first with the explicit name written in the role and only if unsuccessfully it will then try a relaxed lookup. E.g.,:
However, this is not ideal, as there can be ambiguity when referencing function parameters(though note #8310 is not in this branch yet):Here, because the lookup for untagged names selects the first matching entry in the symbol table, we get inconsistency in whatf1.i
andf2.i
points to.How should cross-references be written to not rely on declaration order, and still allow referencing all entities?Would it be ok always to explicitly write tags in cross references? The (temporary) config varc_strict_xref_tags
can be set toTrue
to enforce explicit tagging in cross references.